› ›

Two whole years later- No Time To Die. A fitting end to a particular timeline, or a Bond faux pas?

chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
in No Time To Die Posts: 17,827
I'm beginning to think this was a good choice for Craig... I mean, his Bond was looking forward to death from early on, eh?
His was not the enduring Connery Bond, the one off Lazenby Bond, the softer Moore Bond, the flavourful Dalton Bond, or the full-on hero Brosnan Bond...
It's like Bond hit his expiration date.
Which was gonna happen sooner or later!
Okay, playing Devil's advocate here for my own benefit.
Thoughts?
«1345

Comments

  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited March 2023 Posts: 3,800
    Bond will never expire, as long as he can endure and evolve through the changing times.

    The same can be said for the likes of Ethan Hunt, Indiana Jones and etc.

    They're the icons of cinema after all.

    I have no problem with the idea of killing Bond off, I have more of a problem with the story and plot that led to that ending, it would have been fitting to the timeline (the Craig Era only), if the story and the plot was better.
    But what we've got is full of contrivances, convoluted, forced melodrama, returning characters from the previous film (SP) that I don't care about, and etc.
    So, no, it's a faux pas.

    The idea (on paper) was fitting for the timeline.
    The way the film used that idea was faux pas.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,827
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    Bond will never expire, as long as he can endure and evolve through the changing times.

    The same can be said for the likes of Ethan Hunt, Indiana Jones and etc.

    They're the icons of cinema after all.

    I have no problem with the idea of killing Bond off, I have more of a problem with the story and plot that led to that ending, it would have been fitting to the timeline (the Craig Era only), if the story and the plot was better.
    But what we've got is full of contrivances, convoluted, forced melodrama, returning characters from the previous film (SP) that I don't care about, and etc.
    So, no, it's a faux pas.

    The idea (on paper) was fitting for the timeline.
    The way the film used that idea was faux pas.

    Agreed.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,083
    I think it was a fitting end for the particular timeline starring the second-best Bond actor after SC. And one of the greatest James Bond movies ever (unlike its two predecessors). I keep enjoying it thoroughly and have re-watched it more often in the past 1 1/2 years than any other Bond movie in such a short period.
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,858
    The ending still doesn’t work because it’s clear they wrote the ending before they wrote the story… it wasn’t a natural end to the character
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited March 2023 Posts: 3,800
    Risico007 wrote: »
    The ending still doesn’t work because it’s clear they wrote the ending before they wrote the story… it wasn’t a natural end to the character

    Yes, there's no strong backbone to support that idea, and that backbone is the story, so without support, the main concept or idea that they're trying to reach may fall, and that's what happened with NTTD.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,600
    It's neither
  • ColonelAdamskiColonelAdamski UK
    Posts: 1,086
    It stunk.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,600
    It is still a very polarizing film for me because there is so much good in it but once Blofeld is dead, there really isn't much for me that's left to enjoy. The Norway chase and the foggy woods is a great scene but that's pretty much it after Blofeld.

    I highly enjoy the PTS, Jamaica, Cuba which to me is some of the best elements in the Craig era.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited March 2023 Posts: 3,800
    Last_Rat_Standing wrote: »
    It is still a very polarizing film for me because there is so much good in it but once Blofeld is dead, there really isn't much for me that's left to enjoy. The Norway chase and the foggy woods is a great scene but that's pretty much it after Blofeld.

    I highly enjoy the PTS, Jamaica, Cuba which to me is some of the best elements in the Craig era.

    That's one of my least favorite scenes in the film, that's where the forced melodrama happened, and where Bond the character gone, I mean all of what I see in that Norway scenes is Daniel Craig himself, the expressions and reactions, how he moves, that's Craig himself to me, not Bond.

    I'm also not a fan of letting Madeleine do the gun work while having Bond carry the child in that forest, that's already out of character and doesn't make sense, there's nothing would have changed if Bond just let Madeleine carry the child while have Bond shoots the bad guys in that forest, and would have make the scene a bit better at least.

    For me, the film fell apart after the Cuba scenes, that's where it all ends.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    When writing scripts, most screenwriters come up with an idea, and focus on how the film would end… Then they go back to the beginning and work on the various plot twists and plot points. So…

  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,600
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    Last_Rat_Standing wrote: »
    It is still a very polarizing film for me because there is so much good in it but once Blofeld is dead, there really isn't much for me that's left to enjoy. The Norway chase and the foggy woods is a great scene but that's pretty much it after Blofeld.

    I highly enjoy the PTS, Jamaica, Cuba which to me is some of the best elements in the Craig era.

    That's one of my least favorite scenes in the film, that's where the forced melodrama happened, and where Bond the character gone, I mean all of what I see in that Norway scenes is Daniel Craig himself, the expressions and reactions, how he moves, that's Craig himself to me, not Bond.

    I'm also not a fan of letting Madeleine do the gun work while having Bond carry the child in that forest, that's already out of character and doesn't make sense, there's nothing would have changed if Bond just let Madeleine carry the child while have Bond shoots the bad guys in that forest, and would have make the scene a bit better at least.

    For me, the film fell apart after the Cuba scenes, that's where it all ends.

    We can agree to disagree. Bond luring them away from Madeline, setting traps, killing Ash, especially with the line given regarding Felix. The chase with cars itself is ok but I love the environment in the woods and for someone who's shot tracer rounds before, that was really cool to see on screen.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited March 2023 Posts: 3,800
    Last_Rat_Standing wrote: »
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    Last_Rat_Standing wrote: »
    It is still a very polarizing film for me because there is so much good in it but once Blofeld is dead, there really isn't much for me that's left to enjoy. The Norway chase and the foggy woods is a great scene but that's pretty much it after Blofeld.

    I highly enjoy the PTS, Jamaica, Cuba which to me is some of the best elements in the Craig era.

    That's one of my least favorite scenes in the film, that's where the forced melodrama happened, and where Bond the character gone, I mean all of what I see in that Norway scenes is Daniel Craig himself, the expressions and reactions, how he moves, that's Craig himself to me, not Bond.

    I'm also not a fan of letting Madeleine do the gun work while having Bond carry the child in that forest, that's already out of character and doesn't make sense, there's nothing would have changed if Bond just let Madeleine carry the child while have Bond shoots the bad guys in that forest, and would have make the scene a bit better at least.

    For me, the film fell apart after the Cuba scenes, that's where it all ends.

    We can agree to disagree. Bond luring them away from Madeline, setting traps, killing Ash, especially with the line given regarding Felix. The chase with cars itself is ok but I love the environment in the woods and for someone who's shot tracer rounds before, that was really cool to see on screen.

    I mean, Bond could still do that even he's not carrying the child, like what I've said, if one may swap or reverse Madeleine and Bond's roles in that scene, nothing would still have changed.

    I've rewatched that scene many times, and I still don't get why he gave Madeleine the gun, and have Bond himself carry the child, if it's meant to lure the bad guys, he could still do it even with him not carrying the child.

    He can still lure the bad guys, while Madeleine was carrying the child while finding a hideout.

    I'm having a thought that they've did that for the sake of girl power (or dare I say it, feminism), by having Bond carry the child, and Madeleine carrying a gun.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,186
    I must say I was let down by the Norway chase. Because the trailers made it look like a big scene. I expected something inventive or at least some dangerous stunts or unique camera work to be done on the Atlantic Road. I also expected the action to be more inventive in the woods....maybe trees falling and exploding as they shoot would have added more to it with Bond himself dodging some trees and explosions. Another thing is, the scene ends too soon. Also, Fukunaga isn't a natural Bond action director like Martin Campbell and it shows in some scenes.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    I guess I’m in the minority who, two years later, considers NTTD a poignant film and the appropriate end to this James Bond.

    I’ve said this before: it was like I was watching the final images of a dying man as his final moments flashed before his eyes. Everything from the gun barrel (and Bond’s faded image), to his death felt like a surreal dream, seen through the perspective of the dying character.

    I loved it on Day One.

    I love it more now.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 2,026
    For me, almost as troubling as Bond's death are the Safin nanobots that ensure his demise. The DC series gives us a more serious Bond but a technology that is currently as far fetched as hollowed out volcanoes and undetected space stations. Heracles essentially serves only one purpose in the film, to ensure Bond's death. Blofeld's plot in OHMSS was more plausible. While NTTD gets better with each viewing, Safin's plot and Bond's death do not. It simply wasn't necessary. Every other actor ended his tenure without a death scene. After sixty years, we know the drill. Bond films have long ceased to display any connection or coherence to each other once actors change. Even when old faces appear in new films, we now assume the same actor playing the same character is not the same character they previously played, but a new version in a new timeline.

    I come back to the same question. What did Bond's death add to the film? It doesn't feel poignant as much as it feels misguided. It would have worked as easily at the end if Bond were driving the Aston with Madeleine by his side and Matilde in the back seat. We Have All the Time in the World could still play over and actually be more meaningful, because they would have all the time in the world.

    If we accept that each Bond is different and in his own timeline, then Bond driving into the sunset with his family wouldn't be any more problematic than killing him off. Either way, when the next film starts there will be plenty of fans saying, wasn't Bond killed? Or, didn't he retire with his family?

    I look forward to the next Bond. Hopefully that occurs without P&W. Time to let others pen the next Bond films. Like DC, it is time for them to move on. One can hope the next Bond film will be as good as FRWL, OHMSS, or CR.

  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,083
    peter wrote: »
    I guess I’m in the minority who, two years later, considers NTTD a poignant film and the appropriate end to this James Bond.

    I’ve said this before: it was like I was watching the final images of a dying man as his final moments flashed before his eyes. Everything from the gun barrel (and Bond’s faded image), to his death felt like a surreal dream, seen through the perspective of the dying character.

    I loved it on Day One.

    I love it more now.
    Glad I'm not alone.

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    I come back to the same question. What did Bond's death add to the film? It doesn't feel poignant as much as it feels misguided. It would have worked as easily at the end if Bond were driving the Aston with Madeleine by his side and Matilde in the back seat. We Have All the Time in the World could still play over and actually be more meaningful, because they would have all the time in the world./quote]

    Death is the ultimate sacrifice; accepting death and no longer fighting the inevitable is the final heroic act; the aftermath and the fables told after are iconically mythological.

    Over the five Craig films, we witnessed the hero’s journey from inception until his death.

    It was incredibly beautiful and I’ve watched the five films one after the other and this is a wholly satisfying journey, in my eyes.

    @j_w_pepper : we can start our own fan club, 😂. It may be we two, but it’ll be our happy place!
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    edited March 2023 Posts: 2,641
    I wish they had have built the story of NTTD around M's speech in Spectre "maybe it's the fate of spies to just disappear" then build the ending up to a crescendo and rather than knowing Bond was blown up, it could be left more open ended. More in line with Fleming (FRWL/YOLT) and leaving room for discussion.

    The finality to the ending of NTTD is depressing, when Bond 26 isn't on the horizon.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,479
    My opinion of the film has worsened in the two years. I haven't had an urge to watch it at all which is weird for me. In fact the last two of Craig fall into that list.

    It is a beautifully shot film. It has some exciting action sequences. But the plot is rather thin and could have been so much more. Why did they feel the need to bring a child into things? Did she serve a point to the plot? Nope. The main villain wanted her and then when she bit his hand he drops her and lets her run off. Makes no sense.

    The plot might have been better served with Blofeld as the main villain. After the events of SP it would have upped the stakes if Blofeld escaped from prision and then start from there. Instead we get a villain who doesn't age even though significant time passes. We get a villain that wants revenge on SPECTRE. He gets it and then he continues with a plot to destroy the world? Or does he merely want money in a world infected with his nano bots?

    I enjoyed Craig's first 3 films as Bond. The last two were bloated and contrived. A shame we couldn't have had a trilogy instead of 5 films.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited March 2023 Posts: 2,186
    I'm still very surprised Waltz accepted the invitation to return, only to be killed off....when he knew he needed a performance to make fans forget his SP performance. I'm also very surprised EON didn't see NTTD as an opportunity for Bond and Blofeld to have that hellish battle. I don't know, but I think Waltz's poor performance as Blofeld might have affected his career negatively.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    edited March 2023 Posts: 9,083
    peter wrote: »
    @j_w_pepper : we can start our own fan club, 😂. It may be we two, but it’ll be our happy place!
    OK, where shall the club meet? How about the Azores or Iceland...somewhere halfways?

    PS: I have a feeling that there are two or more likely members of the club...just not on this thread so far.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,083
    SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ wrote: »
    I'm still very surprised Waltz accepted the invitation to return, only to be killed off....when he knew he needed a performance to make fans forget his SP performance. I'm also very surprised EON didn't see NTTD as an opportunity for Bond and Blofeld to have that hellish battle. I don't know, but I think Waltz's poor performance as Blofeld might have affected his career negatively.

    I don't think Waltz's performance was bad at all. He's basically giving the same character as in Inglourious Basterds, which obviously was expected of him. It's the script of SP that is to blame, which most of us will agree was idiotic regarding the foster brother jealousy story, but the only reproach I can make against Waltz is taking that role. But there was probably a six- or seven-digit argument against doing so, so I don't blame him.

    It's also ok that they finished him off in NTTD, to end the ark of the Craig timeline, as with the death of Felix Leiter and of Bond himself.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,800
    Our opinions on NTTD vary, maybe whatever we feel towards the film, it's subjective.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,382
    How would people have felt if FRWL was the last novel, or YOLT?
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,521
    echo wrote: »
    How would people have felt if FRWL was the last novel, or YOLT?

    The YOLT novel would have been the perfect ending for me.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited March 2023 Posts: 2,186
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ wrote: »
    I'm still very surprised Waltz accepted the invitation to return, only to be killed off....when he knew he needed a performance to make fans forget his SP performance. I'm also very surprised EON didn't see NTTD as an opportunity for Bond and Blofeld to have that hellish battle. I don't know, but I think Waltz's poor performance as Blofeld might have affected his career negatively.

    I don't think Waltz's performance was bad at all. He's basically giving the same character as in Inglourious Basterds, which obviously was expected of him. It's the script of SP that is to blame, which most of us will agree was idiotic regarding the foster brother jealousy story, but the only reproach I can make against Waltz is taking that role. But there was probably a six- or seven-digit argument against doing so, so I don't blame him.

    It's also ok that they finished him off in NTTD, to end the ark of the Craig timeline, as with the death of Felix Leiter and of Bond himself.

    I still very much think Waltz's Blofeld should have been given something epic to do in NTTD. Since Waltz's strength as an actor is to be subtle, then make him a subtle and evasive villain.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    edited March 2023 Posts: 9,083
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    Our opinions on NTTD vary, maybe whatever we feel towards the film, it's subjective.
    Sure. What else?
    FoxRox wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    How would people have felt if FRWL was the last novel, or YOLT?

    The YOLT novel would have been the perfect ending for me.
    Yes. But they missed that chance by turning it into a totally different story in 1967. And in the novels, Bond was sort of resurrected...something that Craig, at least, seemed to want to avoid. They won't revive the same James Bond after NTTD, or the suspension of disbelief would really have to be excessive.

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    Why did they feel the need to bring a child into things? Did she serve a point to the plot? Nope. The main villain wanted her and then when she bit his hand he drops her and lets her run off. Makes no sense.

    Whether you agree or disagree, having a child ups the stakes, especially for Bond as he just discovered that this is his daughter.

    And Safin never wanted Mathilde, @thedove …

    He wanted Madeleine.

    He tells Bond this, that he wants to keep her (as if Madeleine’s some kind of toy), and Bond replies, “You know I can’t do that”. Mathilde was just a bargaining chip to Safin.

    Once again, I love this concept and watching Bond fight for his family had me (and has me), on the edge of my seat.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,078
    Have watched it fully 9 times since it's release. I love it on every viewing, and I don't think that will change.

    Yes, the story is contrived and far fetched, but for all of that it's still an engrossing watch. The direction and pacing is one of it's greatest strengths. Every time I watch it, it never feels like 2 & 1/2 hours.

    For all it's faults (and there's a few) the film works and it all flows together nicely, unlike SP. Not mad on the ending but the assault on the stairs is the badass action sequence Craig deserved to go out on.

    Dialogue, acting, editing, photography and music also all very good.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,593
    A fitting end to a particular timeline. That was my opinion when it came out and it hasn’t changed.
Sign In or Register to comment.